Friday, June 04, 2010

Proposal: Random Monster Generator

Times out with more than half of votes FOR. -Bucky

Adminned at 06 Jun 2010 15:47:42 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset.  Call it “Basic Monsters” and give it the following text:

The list of septuplets at the end of this rule is the Basic Monster Table.  The items in the septuplets describe a monster’s internal ID (a number), name (text), hit points (formula that may include DICE rolls), damage (two numbers separated by a ‘d’), a speed (one of Sessile, Slow, Medium, Fast, Very Fast), Intelligence (Yes or No), and special effects (ruletext associated with the monster, or None).

(0, Grid Bug, DICE3, 1d1, Slow, No, damage is 0d0 if attacking something shock-resistant)
(1, Newt, DICE6, 1d2, Medium, No, None)
(2, Kobold, DICE3 + 1, 1d4, Medium, Yes, has a Ranged attack that does 1d2 damage)
(3, Goblin, 2DICE3, 1d3, Medium, Yes, None)
(4, Coyote, DICE6 + 2, 1d4, Medium, No, None)
(5, Gnome, 2DICE4, 1d6, Slow, Yes, None)
(6, Hill Orc, 2DICE6 1d8, Medium, Yes, None)
(7, Rothe, 2DICE4, 3d3, Fast, No, None)

The admin who enacts this proposal may convert the information in the Basic Monster Table to a table rather than a list of .  Should said admin not do so, the RNG may do so, once, at any time before the end of the dynasty.

Mainly to get the format established - we can fill out the table later.  Monsters should be in the table in roughly difficulty order, so that we can use DICEX+Y to select monsters of an appropriate difficulty range.  Intelligence is basically whether the monster can pick up and carry stuff.  Speed is how easy it is to run away from.

Comments

Put:

04-06-2010 04:54:23 UTC

for

lilomar:

04-06-2010 12:38:32 UTC

a list of .  ???
imperial

Hix:

04-06-2010 14:21:28 UTC

against and what’s this “d” business?

Klisz:

04-06-2010 14:52:28 UTC

Hix: Standard D notation.

against ; I’d like the monster list to be informal so that I can make up some monsters on the spot. I’ll take most monsters out of the actual game though (stats swiped from Wikihack).

Wooble:

04-06-2010 14:59:22 UTC

imperial

Bucky:

04-06-2010 15:50:01 UTC

@Darth:The table doesn’t mean we won’t have other monsters - it just means that if an @ reads a scroll of create monster he can generate the monster himself.

Put:

04-06-2010 15:51:15 UTC

Yeah wait, now I checked and apparently septuplets are like 7-baby triplets. huh?  imperial

lilomar:

04-06-2010 15:52:51 UTC

@put, or, more generally, a collection of seven of anything.

Klisz:

04-06-2010 16:09:40 UTC

for CoV per Bucky

Put:

04-06-2010 17:10:00 UTC

@lilomar yes, but it’s not a list of septulets. The list itself IS a septulet. also it would be required that every time a monster is added that will have to be changed to a word denoting a higher number, which will eventually become a problem.

Klisz:

04-06-2010 17:14:16 UTC

No, Put, it’s a list of lists, each of which contains seven items and therefore are septuplets. (Besides, the list starts at zero so there are eight items in the list anyway.)

lilomar:

04-06-2010 17:15:35 UTC

no, it is a list of septuplets, it just so happens that the list is seven septuplets long.

there are seven fields in each item in the list
1:ID (a number)
2:name (text)
3:hit points (formula that may include DICE rolls)
4:damage (two numbers separated by a ‘d’)
5:a speed (one of Sessile, Slow, Medium, Fast, Very Fast)
6:Intelligence (Yes or No)
7:special effects (ruletext associated with the monster, or None)

Klisz:

04-06-2010 17:17:28 UTC

I’d take it lilomar started writing his comment before I posted mine?

lilomar:

04-06-2010 17:17:42 UTC

ninja’d. also, nice catch on the 0-indexing, didn’t notice that myself.

lilomar:

04-06-2010 17:20:11 UTC

dangit, double-ninja’d.

Rodney:

04-06-2010 18:36:30 UTC

for

h2g2guy:

04-06-2010 19:34:22 UTC

for

Freezerbird:

04-06-2010 20:34:46 UTC

You’re all wrong. It’s a list of eight septets. Each item (ID, HP etc) in each septet (Grid Bug, Newt etc) is a septuplet. If seven kids are born together, each one is a septuplet and as a group they are a septet. against but I didn’t start the pedantry.

Klisz:

04-06-2010 20:38:06 UTC

Freezerbird, in this case I think we can definitely call it a typo.

Hix:

04-06-2010 20:44:34 UTC

“septet” has strong connotations with a group of musicians or instruments.  A word for a more general context would be “septuple” (I’m surprised no one has mentioned this one) or “7-tuple”, but not “septuplet” (which is mostly only used when talking about 1 of 7 simultaneously gestated organisms)

Freezerbird:

04-06-2010 21:17:01 UTC

Hmm. “Septuple” is normally a verb or adjective I think, not a noun - unless you’re talking about (e.g.) 70 being a septuple of 10.

But DC, you’re right, I’m just enjoying being as sticky as the next @. As long as we can agree what it’s a typo for: cov for

ais523:

04-06-2010 21:28:37 UTC

Hix is right, it’s a 7-tuple (in the programming sense).  for

Jumblin McGrumblin:

04-06-2010 22:31:56 UTC

for Ignoring the septuple debate and calling it a typo

Galdyn:

05-06-2010 03:14:30 UTC

imperial Don’t really know how monster stats will effect any sort of combat.

Darknight: he/him

05-06-2010 07:10:51 UTC

imperial If only cause I have no clue what the heck half of you guys are talking about, which seems to be the reason behind most of the fors and against votes.

Qwazukee:

05-06-2010 09:51:23 UTC

imperial

Put:

05-06-2010 19:21:20 UTC

Huh. well for

Aquafraternally Yours:

06-06-2010 05:55:43 UTC

for I also understand it to be a typo. I think we all understood - the vital component to communication. I like it. Let’s run with it.  Make sure to add a water nymph. She gets me every time…

lilomar:

06-06-2010 14:46:25 UTC

@aqua ... I’m sure she does. :P